no title

Surprise!

‘Free’ health care for all is getting further from free by the day

About our Editorials

Dispatch editorials express the view of the
Dispatch editorial board, which is made up of the publisher, the president of
The Dispatch, the editor and the editorial-writing staff. As is the traditional newspaper
practice, the editorials are unsigned and intended to be seen as the voice of the newspaper.
Comments and questions should be directed to the
editorial page editor.

Also in Opinion

Subscribe to The Dispatch

Already a subscriber?
Enroll in EZPay and get a free gift!
Enroll now.

Monday December 17, 2012 5:39 AM

New, unwelcome surprises keep coming from the 2010 health-care overhaul that supporters long
have contended would “bend the cost curve” and become increasingly popular as people learned more
about the supposedly free benefits provided to consumers.

It bent the cost curve all right — up.

Those who are paying attention have noticed, both from their paychecks and from sources such as
the Congressional Budget Office and the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, that the
health-care bill isn’t bringing down costs. Employers from national restaurant chains to Ohio
colleges have said they will cut back on workers’ hours to avoid being required to provide
insurance coverage or being penalized under regulations taking effect in 2013.

And how bad are the hidden taxes in this signature legislation from President Barack Obama, who
promised the “most transparent” administration in history before ramming through a 2,400-page bill
in the middle of the night, along party lines and with the aid of backroom deals?

We’re still finding out about them two and a half years later. Now, even some of the
most-liberal Democratic senators are urging Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid to delay
implementation of the bill’s 2.3 percent tax on medical devices, which could harm U.S. businesses
and workers.

In addition to the foreseeable expenses and inconveniences, new charges are cropping up. A $63
per-person fee on employers to help cover the cost of covering those with pre-existing conditions
was tucked into a recent regulation. On the last Friday of November, the Health and Human Services
Department announced that insurance companies will be charged a 3.5 percent cut of any premiums
sold through federal exchanges being set up. These charges to insurers almost certainly will be
passed on to consumers.

There also are disincentives to save or invest, for those fortunate enough to have incomes of
more than $200,000 a year — the people who typically create jobs: A 3.8 percent tax on interest,
dividends and capital gains is set to take effect Jan. 1. As Alan D. Viard wrote for Bloomberg
News, the so-called unearned-income Medicare contribution tax is a “triple misnomer,” since the
income isn’t unearned; the money will be paid into the general Treasury, not directly to Medicare;
and it’s a required payment, not a “contribution.”

It’s no wonder a Gallup survey in late November found that, for the first time since 2000, a
majority of Americans said it is not the responsibility of the federal government to ensure that
everyone has health-care coverage.

Instead of liking it the more they know of it, Americans continue to turn on the law because
they understand that in reality, there’s no such thing as a free lunch. Now that they’re seeing it
in their own pocketbooks, that truism is reinforced.